Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-06T23:48:47.709Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Transgressive segregation and maternal genetic effects of non–target site fluazifop-P-butyl tolerance in Zoysia spp.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2019

Wenwen Liu
Affiliation:
Graduate Research Assistant, Department of Agronomy, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
Kevin E. Kenworthy
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Agronomy, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
Gregory E. MacDonald
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Agronomy, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
J. Bryan Unruh
Affiliation:
Professor, West Florida Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Jay, FL, USA
Laurie E. Trenholm
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Environmental Horticulture, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
Ramon G. Leon*
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Ramon G. Leon, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695. Email: rleon@ncsu.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Zoysia germplasm exhibit different levels of sensitivity to fluazifop-P-butyl, but the genetic factors responsible for such differences are unknown. Segregation patterns of the fluazifop-P-butyl tolerance trait were studied under greenhouse conditions. In total, 244 F1 lines were generated from multiple crosses between the tolerant line 5337-2 (non–target site tolerance) and three more-sensitive lines (123, 252, and 5330-23). Progeny segregation showed that fluazifop-P-butyl tolerance within zoysiagrass (Zoysia spp.) is expressed as a quantitative trait with a wide range of intermediate phenotypes between parental phenotypes. Transgressive segregation was extensive and largely favored susceptibility in most families, but was especially evident for 5337-2 × 123 and 5337-2 × 5330-23. The segregation patterns for biomass reduction and percent injury were different within reciprocal crosses and among three different family crosses. Reciprocal effects were observed in growth reduction for 5337-2 × 5330-23, in percent injury at 3 wk after the treatment (WAT), and for 5337-2 × 252 at 6 WAT. This indicated that fluazifop-P-butyl tolerance was not completely controlled by nuclear genetic factors in 5337-2 and maternal/cytoplasmic inheritance was also partially responsible. These results suggested that fluazifop-P-butyl tolerance may be attributed to multiple genetic mechanisms, which could present a challenge for future breeding efforts because of the difficulty of fixing multiple traits within a breeding population.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2019 
Figure 0

Figure 1. Frequency distribution of 244 zoysiagrass F1 lines from crosses of a tolerant line (5337-2) and three lines (123, 252, and 5330-23) varying in susceptibility to fluazifop-P-butyl based on growth reduction determined by clippings collected at 6 wk after treatment in response to fluazifop-P-butyl (176 g ai ha−1) under greenhouse conditions in Gainesville, FL, averaged across three replications and two experimental runs.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Frequency distribution of 244 zoysiagrass F1 lines from crosses of a tolerant line (5337-2) and three lines (123, 252, and 5330-23) varying in susceptibility to fluazifop-P-butyl based on injury at 3 wk after treatment with fluazifop-P-butyl (176 g ai ha−1) under greenhouse conditions in Gainesville, FL, averaged across three replications and two experimental runs.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Frequency distribution of 244 zoysiagrass F1 lines from crosses of a tolerant line (5337-2) and three lines (123, 252, and 5330-23) varying in susceptibility to fluazifop-P-butyl based on injury at 6 wk after treatment with fluazifop-P-butyl (176 g ai ha−1) under greenhouse conditions in Gainesville, FL, averaged across three replications and two experimental runs.

Figure 3

Table 1. Differences in response to fluazifop-P-butyl (176 g ai ha−1) between zoysiagrass progeny from different crosses (reciprocal crosses were pooled) and between progeny from each reciprocal cross.a

Figure 4

Table 2. Chi-square tests for genetic inheritance models for crosses of a tolerant line (5337-2) and three lines (123, 252, and 5330-23) varying in susceptibility to fluazifop-P-butyl based on growth reduction determined by clippings collected at 6 wk after treatment (WAT), injury at 3 WAT, and injury at 6 WAT in response to fluazifop-P-butyl (176 g ai ha−1) under greenhouse conditions in Gainesville, FL, averaged across three replications and two experimental runs.a